Jump to content

Massachusetts Ballot Initiative


Recommended Posts

Isn't that what methadone is? Not that it's a great solution (because it's not a great substance), but it is the placeholder for such a solution, isn't it?
Exactly.Methadone - HeroinMarinol - MarijuanaMDMA - EctacyAmphetamine - Methamphetamine
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 357
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well a democracy that runs today is largely a representative one. We elect politicians and then let them get on with making what they believe to be the best decisions. If every politician we elect was solely an empty head that represented his constituencies views entirely, then I don't think we would be quite where we are today at all. Not to mention that it is virtually impossible for a MP (or House rep in your case) to get an accurate picture of exactly what the public are thinking on most issues.
You are correct in a democracy, but again, we are not a democracy. As a representative republic we elect leaders who are expected to do more than "follow", and are expected to be better than the collective population.
With Congress approval ratings below 20%, are people in office really wanted?Also,BALLCOCK.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Exactly.Methadone - HeroinMarinol - MarijuanaMDMA - EctacyAmphetamine - Methamphetamine
Hmmm, no. Got to clear up a few things here. First, methadone doesn't qualify as what hblask described because it is addictive on its own. Marinol is THC (tetrahydrocannibinol), one of the active ingredients in marijuana. So it's not really an alternative, its just the main active ingredient. MDMA == ecstasy. Ecstasy is just the street name of MDMA (Methylenedioxymethamphetamine). Methamphetamine is amphetamine with a methyl group added, which makes it more addictive and dangerous than regular amphetamine.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmm, no. Got to clear up a few things here. First, methadone doesn't qualify as what hblask described because it is addictive on its own. Marinol is THC (tetrahydrocannibinol), one of the active ingredients in marijuana. So it's not really an alternative, its just the main active ingredient. MDMA == ecstasy. Ecstasy is just the street name of MDMA (Methylenedioxymethamphetamine). Methamphetamine is amphetamine with a methyl group added, which makes it more addictive and dangerous than regular amphetamine.
Thanks, I was and still am extremely confused at what senor guapo was talking about. Methadone addiction though does have some advantages over heroin addiction, which is why I said it was the placeholder for a better "cure."
Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmm, no. Got to clear up a few things here. First, methadone doesn't qualify as what hblask described because it is addictive on its own. Marinol is THC (tetrahydrocannibinol), one of the active ingredients in marijuana. So it's not really an alternative, its just the main active ingredient. MDMA == ecstasy. Ecstasy is just the street name of MDMA (Methylenedioxymethamphetamine). Methamphetamine is amphetamine with a methyl group added, which makes it more addictive and dangerous than regular amphetamine.
I know all that. I was trying to equate that there are legal versions of most illegal drugs.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I know all that. I was trying to equate that there are legal versions of most illegal drugs.
OK, I can sort of see what you were getting at now... if by legal you mean can be prescribed by a doctor, then your first column works, all except ecstasy, and in the 2nd column methamphetamine can be prescribed as well as regular amphetamine.Sorry to be nitpicky. Here's how the breakdown looks:Schedule I (no accepted medical use)heroinMDMAmarijuanaSchedule II (has a medical use)methadonemarinolamphetaminemethamphetamineThe federal drug scheduling system is a total mess. The fact that MDMA and cannibis are schedule I, while meth, cocaine, and PCP are schedule II is ridiculous. Add in that alcohol and tobacco are unscheduled given their potential for abuse and dependency and you have total absurdity.
Link to post
Share on other sites

For whatever reason I thought this had no chance of passing. Right now though it has nearly a 2-1 lead with 22% reporting. I dunno which 22% really, but it certainly is doing well.The income tax removal law got laughed down (currently 70% voting no).

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Boston Globe has predicted that this initiative has passed. 53% reporting and it has 65% in favor.EDIT:http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_...ion_2_setu.html
Yay! Now if only a few more states and maybe even the govn't got behind this we could start to turn the corner on this rediculous drug war
Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey! So it passed??? Man I saw a pig fly yesterday too and my life is now complete, lol.what does the new law say? What is the status on marijuana?
Possession of 1 ounce or less is legal. Possession of more than 1 ounce is a felony. Possess more than 1 ounce within 3 blocks of a school and you can be shot on sight. Possess 50 plants or more in Hyannisport and youre a national hero.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Far too much $$$ and effort has been spent trying to defame marijuana. Concentrate on the meth, crack and xtasy labs. Seriously, stop wasting your time trying to arrest people who are only concerned about what flavor of Ben and Jerry's they're going to eat while watching a Star Trek re-run.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Possession of 1 ounce or less is legal. Possession of more than 1 ounce is a felony. Possess more than 1 ounce within 3 blocks of a school and you can be shot on sight. Possess 50 plants or more in Hyannisport and youre a national hero.
Heh. Just to clear it up a little bit, possession of 1 ounce or less is not actually legal, but it is now a civil offense rather than a criminal one. Like getting a parking ticket. The punishment is confiscation and a $100 fine, and if you are under 18 it also comes with mandatory drug counseling or something.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Heh. Just to clear it up a little bit, possession of 1 ounce or less is not actually legal, but it is now a civil offense rather than a criminal one. Like getting a parking ticket. The punishment is confiscation and a $100 fine, and if you are under 18 it also comes with mandatory drug counseling or something.
One of my favorite things about smoking dope was how many pot heads fancied themselves to be sidewalk lawyers.Full understanding of search and seizure laws, etc.It'll be funny when the feds come in and the pot head starts his litany of the new Mass legislation and the feds laugh.
Link to post
Share on other sites
One of my favorite things about smoking dope was how many pot heads fancied themselves to be sidewalk lawyers.Full understanding of search and seizure laws, etc.It'll be funny when the feds come in and the pot head starts his litany of the new Mass legislation and the feds laugh.
As this movement grows, one of two things will happen. One, the feds will give up on their stupidity, and leave the states alone, ortwo, some state will bring out the national guard and tell the feds "we'll take care of this our way".Hopefully, the first.
Link to post
Share on other sites
One of my favorite things about smoking dope was how many pot heads fancied themselves to be sidewalk lawyers.Full understanding of search and seizure laws, etc.It'll be funny when the feds come in and the pot head starts his litany of the new Mass legislation and the feds laugh.
California has proven that for the most part the Feds have better things to do. Do you really think this should be an FBI priority? Cracking down on potheads?Federal courts, by the way, are known to take search and seizure laws pretty seriously (unless the alleged criminal is not American, then screw 'em).
Link to post
Share on other sites
California has proven that for the most part the Feds have better things to do. Do you really think this should be an FBI priority? Cracking down on potheads?Federal courts, by the way, are known to take search and seizure laws pretty seriously (unless the alleged criminal is not American, then screw 'em).
Actually the California situation has proven that the feds won't just let this go. The DEA has staged periodic raids and shutdowns of the medical marijuana distributors in California. Here's a recent one; all the Santa Barbara co-ops were shut down in september. According to NORML, over 100 people/groups have been federally charged in marijuana cases in California.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Stupid cancer patients, wanting to get relief from their symptoms. Jail is too good for them, they should be tortured and killed. Oh wait......

Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually the California situation has proven that the feds won't just let this go. The DEA has staged periodic raids and shutdowns of the medical marijuana distributors in California. Here's a recent one; all the Santa Barbara co-ops were shut down in september. According to NORML, over 100 people/groups have been federally charged in marijuana cases in California.
periodic is a long way from cracking down. They just let them know who is boss from time to time. And since only the DEA has the time and inclination to do this nonsense, the more states that decriminalize (contrary to backward Federal Laws) the more resources the DEA will have to expend to "combat the menace of medical marijuana."
Link to post
Share on other sites
One of my favorite things about smoking dope was how many pot heads fancied themselves to be sidewalk lawyers.Full understanding of search and seizure laws, etc.It'll be funny when the feds come in and the pot head starts his litany of the new Mass legislation and the feds laugh.
yeah, I don't really see the DEA spending too much time and money on shaking down hippies for their quarter bags anytime soon. Under an oz has never been federal jurisdiction to begin with.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Stupid cancer patients, wanting to get relief from their symptoms. Jail is too good for them, they should be tortured and killed. Oh wait......
Yea, I agree, cancer patients need to inhale burning weed in order to deal with the cancer they often got from...smoking a burning weed?
Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea, I agree, cancer patients need to inhale burning weed in order to deal with the cancer they often got from...smoking a burning weed?
I'll have you know that my family has a long history of glaucoma, and since it has a strong hereditary link, I just consider it preventative medicine.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea, I agree, cancer patients need to inhale burning weed in order to deal with the cancer they often got from...smoking a burning weed?
I know you're trying to be funny, but you're smarter than this.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...